thommo2010 Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 1 hour ago, HiVibes said: Wait has he died? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted August 13 Share Posted August 13 5 hours ago, thommo2010 said: Wait has he died? Carrying that weight, take a guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anyone Posted August 15 Share Posted August 15 On 8/13/2024 at 2:24 PM, HiVibes said: Lol fucking curling is an 'olympic sport', as for breakdancing the skill level is amazing, check out Hiro from Japan 2 minutes in, and then lets see the old chuff on here have a crack... You should try curling. It’s not as easy as it looks. I doubt you will though. Awaits abusive response😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 On 8/1/2024 at 10:09 PM, HeliX said: Entrance to women's sport is typically decided by testosterone level... I thought that hadn't "typically" been the case for at least a year? I may be mistaken but I thought that the world governing bodies of at least two of the biggest Olympic sports (swimming and athletics - and triathlon also) had introduced rules preventing anybody who had gone through male puberty from competing in women's events - regardless of their level of testosterone. The point being of course that it isn't a competitor's current level of testosterone that is important, it's whether the level of testosterone experienced by males during puberty has given men irreversible - and therefore unfair - advantages over women who have not experienced exposure to testosterone at that level. AIUI that essentially means that "trans-women" who have gone through male puberty are banned from competing in women only events in those sports no matter what their level of testosterone. So far as I'm aware (and again I may be mistaken) testosterone level only becomes significant as a qualification for women's events in sports like athletics and cycling where the competitor outwardly presents as female* but has some disorder or difference of sex development. And even in those cases my understanding is that the permitted level of testosterone exceeds that normally found in even elite female athletes, giving women athletes with DSD an inbuilt advantage over women*. What I find interesting about athletes with disorders or differences of sexual development is that they only seem to have a visible advantage in women's sports and don't succeed in men's sports. Why do you think that would be? *Again I may be mistaken but I understood that in some of these unfortunate development disorders the subject might possess both female ovaries and internal male testes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 (edited) On 8/1/2024 at 10:32 PM, HeliX said: She's passed the required tests to be allowed to compete... I thought that because of concerns surrounding the governance of world boxing, the IOC had itself taken over control of the sport for the Olympics. I also thought that the IOC had itself said that all a competitor had to prove that they were eligible for the women's boxing competition was that their passport said they were female. I'm not sure that Wikipedia is particularly reliable, but this is what the relevant page says: "Both Khelif and Lin met requirements for the Olympics, with IOC spokesperson Mark Adams defending their requirements and refusing to speak about individual cases, instead saying "everyone competing in the women's category is complying with the competition eligibility rules. They are women in their passports and it is stated that is the case".[297] The IOC said the key criterion is the gender listed on the athlete's passport.[298] The IOC's decision was the subject of controversy and criticism, including from former boxing world champion Barry McGuigan and Australian boxing team captain Caitlin Parker" See Concerns and controversies at the 2024 Summer Olympics - Wikipedia I think it more than a little ironic that the body previously governing world boxing with regard to Olympic competition should be suspended by the IOC on governance grounds while the IOC thinks that all you need to compete in a women's competition is what it says in your passport. What evidence does anybody need to change their sex in their passport? PS - I don't really think that an argument that relies on "Well that's what it says in their passport" is a particularly robust one. It ought to be and it used to be. But I'm not sure it's still the case. [Edit: Just to clarify - I don't believe either of the boxers are trans-women. They both present with DSD] Edited August 16 by Ghost Ship Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Ship Posted August 16 Share Posted August 16 On 8/1/2024 at 10:18 PM, HeliX said: She's been utterly silent on everything women's rights that isn't also anti-trans. And is also incorrectly claiming the boxer is trans. I thought she had founded and bankrolled Beira's Place in Edinburgh, a rape support centre for women. Is that not good enough for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 17 hours ago, Ghost Ship said: I thought that hadn't "typically" been the case for at least a year? I may be mistaken but I thought that the world governing bodies of at least two of the biggest Olympic sports (swimming and athletics - and triathlon also) had introduced rules preventing anybody who had gone through male puberty from competing in women's events - regardless of their level of testosterone. The point being of course that it isn't a competitor's current level of testosterone that is important, it's whether the level of testosterone experienced by males during puberty has given men irreversible - and therefore unfair - advantages over women who have not experienced exposure to testosterone at that level. AIUI that essentially means that "trans-women" who have gone through male puberty are banned from competing in women only events in those sports no matter what their level of testosterone. So far as I'm aware (and again I may be mistaken) testosterone level only becomes significant as a qualification for women's events in sports like athletics and cycling where the competitor outwardly presents as female* but has some disorder or difference of sex development. And even in those cases my understanding is that the permitted level of testosterone exceeds that normally found in even elite female athletes, giving women athletes with DSD an inbuilt advantage over women*. What I find interesting about athletes with disorders or differences of sexual development is that they only seem to have a visible advantage in women's sports and don't succeed in men's sports. Why do you think that would be? *Again I may be mistaken but I understood that in some of these unfortunate development disorders the subject might possess both female ovaries and internal male testes The short answer is that it depends on the sport. I suppose the interesting part about "hasn't experienced male puberty" is how you define that. What sex/genetic disorders are included in that? Where's the cut-off? Do we even understand every potential DSD or disordered genetic expression to be able to categorise in the first place? You're correct that some DSD can result in 1 teste (internal) and 1 ovary, or even ovarian and testicular tissue in the same gonad. Top level sport is inherently unfair. The overwhelming majority of the public could not achieve the performances of top tier athletes even with identical training routines and diets, because sport self-selects genetic abnormalities. The thing that's important is ensuring that people are categorised in the "most" fair way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 16 hours ago, Ghost Ship said: I thought she had founded and bankrolled Beira's Place in Edinburgh, a rape support centre for women. Is that not good enough for you? It's, clearly, commendable (though I'm not entirely convinced that's a women's rights issue?). My complaint is that she is utterly silent on the erosion of womens reproductive rights, and on things like an actual child rapist being present at the Olympics. The only time she comments on "women's rights" is when a trans (or person she perceives to be trans) person is involved. Almost as if what she actually wants is to remove trans people's rights, not further the cause of women's rights... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 55 minutes ago, HeliX said: Top level sport is inherently unfair. That hits the nail on the head. I could have trained with the world’s best coaches from the age of zero for the 100m sprint and still would not have got close to Usain Bolt or any other decent runner. Because of genes. Doesn’t society have to accept that there are a small proportion of people that can’t join in the Olympics because they’re too male for the women’s events, and at the same time not good enough for the male categories? The logical conclusion is that we should have only one open category which would ensure 49.99% of people (ie women, as most of us understand them to be) would be excluded entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted August 17 Share Posted August 17 5 minutes ago, wrighty said: Doesn’t society have to accept that there are a small proportion of people that can’t join in the Olympics because they’re too male for the women’s events, and at the same time not good enough for the male categories? Quite possibly. And I think if it hadn't been leapt on by anti-trans activists that may have been a fairly straightforward outcome. But trying to drag it into an anti-trans argument (when no trans people are involved!) has turned it into another culture war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted August 20 Share Posted August 20 On 8/17/2024 at 5:09 PM, wrighty said: That hits the nail on the head. I could have trained with the world’s best coaches from the age of zero for the 100m sprint and still would not have got close to Usain Bolt or any other decent runner. Because of genes. It's because you're white! On 8/17/2024 at 4:06 PM, HeliX said: Top level sport is inherently unfair. The overwhelming majority of the public could not achieve the performances of top tier athletes even with identical training routines and diets, because sport self-selects genetic abnormalities. The thing that's important is ensuring that people are categorised in the "most" fair way. As per my slightly tongue in cheek comment to Wrighty. Sport doesn't just 'self select genetic abnormalities' the slave trade made a bloody good attempt at inadvertent eugenics. Only the fittest and strongest survived. There's a reason the worlds best sprinters come from what used to be sugar cane plantations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 18 hours ago, The Phantom said: It's because you're white! But when I sprint I identify as black. Don't be mis-racing me, I'll report you and take offence! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 On 8/17/2024 at 5:09 PM, wrighty said: Doesn’t society have to accept that there are a small proportion of people that can’t join in the Olympics because they’re too male for the women’s events, and at the same time not good enough for the male categories? The logical conclusion is that we should have only one open category which would ensure 49.99% of people (ie women, as most of us understand them to be) would be excluded entirely. Aren't the Men's events technically open categories with anyone able to compete anyway? Another solution would be to introduce categories along the lines of the Paralympics that would allow some differentiation for trans athletes and those who have genetic conditions such as the two boxers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 15 minutes ago, manxman1980 said: Aren't the Men's events technically open categories with anyone able to compete anyway? Another solution would be to introduce categories along the lines of the Paralympics that would allow some differentiation for trans athletes and those who have genetic conditions such as the two boxers. Interestingly the use of Testosterone supplements by average guys as a version of HRT is becoming more and more common. The flip side of this is that it is obviously a steroid and many other gym goers are getting hold of it to improve performance and achieve the unrealistic instagram aesthetic now so prevalent. A significant portion of those shredded adonis bodies you see will be on the juice, much more so than in the past. Some of the more mainstream actors are now admitting to it as it is becoming more accepted as 'dude's HRT'. Others who clearly are on it are staying tight lipped for various complex reasons. It's actually becoming quite a problem in amateur sport - park runs, tough mudder, sportives, cross fit etc with enthusiastic non professional sporty types inadvertently competing against the chemically enhanced. They don't generally test anyone (costs would go through the roof) and in the small print for the entries, it will usually say that doping is not allowed. So some of them are now running openly enhanced categories, where people might be just doing it for fun or dudes HRT for genuine reasons, where if you win, you don't really win! Testosterone also seems to be popping up as traditional HRT for middle aged ladies now too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.